Nestle Waters North America has appealed to circuit court a local zoning decision that denies the company approval for a critical piece of water pipeline infrastructure it needs to move extra water from an Osceola County wellhead to market.

The company filed on July 20 in 49th Circuit Court in Reed City.

In the filing, Nestle asked to put the case on hold pending a Michigan Department of Environmental Quality decision on whether to grant Nestle's application to increase the amount of water it pumps from the production well in Osecola Township.

Nestle's application to increase pumping on the White Pine Springs well No. 101, which supplies spring water bottled under the Ice Mountain brand, to 400 gallons-per-minute (gpm) has generated significant public backlash and criticism from Michigan Native American tribes, which have inland fishing rights in the area of the well.

There is concern the increased pumping rate could harm local wetlands and two spring-fed coldwater trout streams that run through the Evart area into the Muskegon River.

A statement from Arlene Anderson-Vincent, natural resources manager at the Nestle Ice Mountain plant in Stanwood, called the court filing an "effort to preserve our rights" to appeal.

Anderson-Vincent said Nestle has asked Osceola Township to agree to hold the case in abeyance until the DEQ makes a decision on Nestle's permit application. The DEQ is not under any deadline to decide whether Nestle can increase its extraction.

The Osceola Township Board will decide whether to agree with Nestle's request to hold the case at its next meeting on Aug. 9, said township attorney William Fahey.

The case has been assigned to Judge Scott Hill-Kennedy, a longtime trustee at the Mecosta County Community Foundation, a philanthropic organization to which Nestle has donated money in the past.

A hearing on the motion to hold the case is scheduled Aug. 16 at 11 a.m.

On June 20, the Osceola Township Zoning Board of Appeals split on whether to overturn the planning commission's earlier denial of a permit to build a booster station needed to increase pressure on a pipeline that moves water from the well to a loading dock in Evart, where tanker trucks pick up the water and drive it to Stanwood.

The tie vote left the denial in place.

In its filing, Nestle's attorney William Horn claims the zoning board did not properly follow procedure and the planning commission attempted to prohibit the controversial water extraction -- which is unpopular with township officials -- by "indirect means."

Hill-Kennedy could decide to move the zoning appeal forward even if both Nestle and Osceola Township agree to an abeyance. He might not want the case sitting on his docket for years while an exhaustive appeal process plays out, Fahey said.

With both cases in the judicial system, Fahey said it's possible they could be pulled together somehow but perhaps not formally joined because they are considering different pieces of the same overall Nestle project.

However, "administratively, it could be convenient to join them once they all get into court," he said.

Because Nestle's application is the first the DEQ has reviewed under a new statute specific to large groundwater withdrawals for bottling, Fahey speculated that any appeal to a permitting decision may eventually wind up before the Michigan Supreme Court.